CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsIsuzu MU-X vs Suzuki Grand Vitara
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Isuzu MU-X vs Suzuki Grand Vitara

A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular SUVs compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.

Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.

Specifications in progress

Suzuki Grand Vitara: we're still completing price, 0-100km/h and warranty.

A blank cell below means we don't have that figure, not that the car scores badly on it. We leave them empty rather than estimate, so any row where one car is blank isn't a like-for-like comparison yet.

SpecIsuzuSuzuki
Price (RRP)$43,900TBC
Fuel typeDieselPetrol
Power120kW122kW
Fuel Economy6.4 L/100km9.5 L/100km
Boot Space311L398L
Towing3,500kg1,700kg
Warranty6yr / 150k km
ANCAP Safety5 StarsNo data

Track the Isuzu MU-X & Suzuki Grand Vitara

Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.

Price Breakdown

Pricing for one or both models is yet to be confirmed for the Australian market. We will update this comparison when official RRPs are announced.

Safety Rundown

ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.

Feature Showdown

The Isuzu MU-X features a 8-inch touchscreen paired with a 4.2-inch digital dash, while the Suzuki Grand Vitara gets a 6.1-inch display.

The Isuzu MU-X stands out with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto — features our data doesn't list for the Suzuki Grand Vitara. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the Isuzu MU-X gets cloth upholstery while the Suzuki Grand Vitara offers fabric.

Drivetrain

The Isuzu MU-X uses a Diesel producing 120kW and 400Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a RWD layout.

The Suzuki Grand Vitara responds with a J24B making 122kW and 225Nm, paired to a 4-speed automatic driving the rear wheels.

The Suzuki Grand Vitara has the clear power advantage at 122kW vs 120kW. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Isuzu MU-X measures 4,860mm long on a 2,855mm wheelbase, 360mm longer than the Suzuki Grand Vitara at 4,500mm (2,640mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Isuzu MU-X generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 311L in the Isuzu MU-X and 398L in the Suzuki Grand Vitara, giving the Suzuki Grand Vitara a 87L advantage. Fold the rears and you get 2138L vs 758L. The Isuzu MU-X seats 7 vs 5.

For towing, the Isuzu MU-X leads with a 3,500kg braked capacity vs 1,700kg. That 1,800kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Turning Circle

Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.

11.0m to 11.6m

TightestSuzuki Grand Vitara Navigator 2.4Tightest turn at 11.0m, easiest U-turns and carparks
Suzuki Grand Vitara Navigator 2.4
11.0mTighter
Best
Isuzu MU-X LS-M 2.2L 4x2
11.6m
Worst
Isuzu MU-X LS-M 2.2L 4x2
11.6m · Average

Based on 11.6m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
Suzuki Grand Vitara Navigator 2.4
11.0m · Good

Based on 11.0m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways

Turning circle ratings

Under 10m, Excellent
10 to 11m, Good
11 to 12m, Average
Over 12m, Large
Compare U-turns side by side

Turning Circle · U-turn compare

kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars
Tap to add/remove
TightestSuzuki Grand VitaraTightest turn at 11.0m, needs the least road to swing around
Isuzu MU-X11.6 m
Average△ 3-point
Suzuki Grand VitaraTightest11.0 m
Good△ 3-point
Scrub the turn

0 of 2 clear a 7.0 m street in one sweep

Green cars complete the U-turn; amber need a 3-point turn. Drag the slider to test tighter streets.

Under 10 m · Excellent 10–11 m · Good 11–12 m · Average Over 12 m · Large

Standard widths: AU local streets ~5.5–7 m; main roads ~9–12 m.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,824/year for the Isuzu MU-X and $2,708/year for the Suzuki Grand Vitara. That is a $884 annual difference in favour of the Isuzu MU-X.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Isuzu MU-X if: You want lower running costs, need stronger towing, or prefer Isuzu's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the Suzuki Grand Vitara if: You prioritise performance, need more boot space, or prefer Suzuki's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

This is genuinely close. The Isuzu MU-X and Suzuki Grand Vitara trade blows across the spec sheet, and neither runs away with an outright win. The Isuzu MU-X will save you roughly $884 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Suzuki Grand Vitara has a clear edge. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.

Common questions

Which is cheapest, Isuzu MU-X and Suzuki Grand Vitara?

The Isuzu MU-X is the cheapest at $43,900 before on-road costs.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Isuzu MU-X uses the least fuel at 6.4L/100km on the combined cycle.

What are the ANCAP safety ratings?

Isuzu MU-X holds a 5-star ANCAP rating. We have no published ANCAP rating for Suzuki Grand Vitara, so there is nothing to compare on crash performance. Compare the active-safety features above instead.

Which has the most boot space?

The Suzuki Grand Vitara has the largest boot at 398L.

Which can tow the most?

The Isuzu MU-X has the highest braked towing capacity at 3,500kg.

Which is the most powerful?

The Suzuki Grand Vitara makes the most power at 122kW.

Free newsletter

Stay across the market

Get our weekly new-car rundown of launches, price moves, deals and reviews, straight from the data.

  • Weekly new-car rundown
  • Price cuts and new deals
  • New launches and reviews

No spam, unsubscribe anytime. By subscribing you agree to receive marketing emails.

Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.

Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation

No comments yet. Be the first!

More head-to-heads

Other matchups worth a look

Same segment, similar money. Tap any pair for the full side-by-side spec sheet.

All comparisons

Images are representative. Actual variant trim, colour and equipment may differ.

Browse all cars · All SUVs · Best mid-size SUVs